SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1990 Supreme(Gau) 128

J.M.SRIVASTAVA, B.P.SARAF
Pankaj Kumar Dasgupta – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura and Ors. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
T.K.Dey, S.Chakraborty, M.Nath, B.Das

B.P.Saraf, J. —

The petitioner is a partner of a firm, namely M/s. S.Das & Company, Agartala. The said firm (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner)' carries on the business of sale and supply of motor parts, tyres ere It is registered as a dealer under the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act) with effect from 9 6 76. The petitioner failed to submit the returns under section 8 of the Act for the three quarters covering the period from 1.7.76 to 31.3.77. Notices were issued to the petitioner by the Superintendent of Taxes from him to time in that regard. The petitioner did not comply with the same. Opportunity was also given in terms of the proviso to section 9 (4) of the Act. The last date was fixed on 27.5.77. The petitioner did not avail of the same. Under tie circumst­ances, the Superintendent of Taxes made his own enquiries for the purpose of making summary assessment. He sent his Inspector to visit the business premises of the petitioner to examine the books of account. The Inspector visited on more than one occasion but the accounts were not made available to him by the petitioner on one plea or the other. The Superintendent of Taxes, therefore

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top